acylhalide

Studying BTech at IIT Delhi. Check out my comment and post history for topics of interest. Please prefer seeing recent comments over older ones as my thoughts have been updating very frequently recently. I spent 18 months deep into cryptocurrency and DeFi before I came here.

profile: samueldashadrach.github.io/EA/

Last updated: March 2022

Topic Contributions

Comments

Try to sell me on [ EA idea ] if I'm [ person with a viewpoint ]

I suggested a similar idea here, although my posts wasn't as clear:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bsBF5KnavhLZ4PAeL/ea-frontpages-should-compare-contrast-with-other-movements

Also I think [person with a viewpoint] needs to be narrowed down to the few most popular viewpoints in the world or atleast developed world, otherwise this becomes a very large task.

Organizational alignment

Not sure why you got downvoted. First para is valid, second seems a bit off context. (Like yes, it's related but is it related enough to actually further the goals of the OP?)

a UBI-generating currency: Global Income Coin

Understood. Sorry for harshness in my original comment then.

a UBI-generating currency: Global Income Coin

Note: OP has assured me the following is not a concern. Haven't deleted the comment so the discussion is still visible.


Potential to be deceptive

I'm using a large heading because I feel the cost of EA supporting fraudulent projects can be high; I don't usually do this.

As someone who has previously worked in the cryptocurrency space, I don't think your stablecoin is likely to maintain peg longterm unless it has significant underlying reserves - USD or other assets. Significant here means atleast 40-50% backing, although it is much better if it higher. You may have seen the recent UST collapse as an example of a large-scale project that collapsed due to insufficient backing - at peak there was $18 billion in UST circulating market cap.

In the absence of backing, it is easy for this project to be deceptively marketed. I am okay with unbacked coins being marketed as explicitly that, as then everyone holding them knows their value is defined purely on memes / narrative, and can make their decisions accordingly. I am also okay with coins that are backed as long as they are transparent about what backing they have, and actually have said backing.  With your project's current pitch, it is easy to mislead users into thinking the coin will maintain a $1 pegged price (or any non-zero price for that matter) due to backing, although in reality it has no backing.

Until you can make sure that the coin will not be deceptively marketed, I also don't think it's a good idea for EA folks to engage with the project.

Did Peter Thiel give "the keynote address at an EA conference"?

Peter Thiel's address to EA in 2013, San Francisco:

Messy personal stuff that affected my cause prioritization (or: how I started to care about AI safety)

My concern about people and animals having net-negative lives has been related to what’s happening with my own depression. 

+1 on this part.

I feel like this is a very common failure mode - people look at the happiness or suffering prevalent in their own personal life and extrapolate it to whether the average person is net positive, zero or negative utility.

EA frontpages should compare/contrast with other movements

Thanks for replying!

You're right there's some difficulty in figuring out which opinions do we want to poll EAs for and present data. And how much would outsiders trust that data, as opposed to perceptions they may have obtained through other means. I didn't fully think this through when I was posting.

re: PR department

I think it would be useful to have PR, although I'm not entirely sure what policies they should take, or how insider versus outsider conversations should be fragmented. Some people have raised issue with the EA forum too because it is too open to outsiders.

re: Dr Gebru's opinions

Yeah if you take a very generous interpretation you can see some of it is based in truth. Although I personally still think it has more to do with her lens of viewing the world combined with assigning way too high priors on how much bias exists in the community. Hence I thought being upfront about how much and what kinds of bias exist might help. Am unsure too. As for her lens itself, it's not one I fully ascribe to but it's a lens a lot of people have, and hence imo it's worth engaging with people from inside of their own perspective or lens.

EA frontpages should compare/contrast with other movements

Hmm, maybe I can call it a prior but from the view of the outsider. Say an outsider with far-left stances comes and talks to 5 EAs, and finds 1 person who shares their far-left opinions, and 1 person who has stances they find repulsive. Or maybe it's not 5 EAs in person they meet, but 5 articles or blog posts they read. They're now going to assume that roughly 20% of EAs are far-left and 20% have opinions they find repulsive, by extrapolating their "prior".

(And sure the ideal thing to do is talk to more than 5 people but not everyone has time or interest for that, which is why I might want EAs to instead present this data to them explicitly.)

EA frontpages should compare/contrast with other movements

I see - this is a valid point.

I was thinking of reporting survey results (of EA opinions on non-EA stances) - do you think it is hard to conduct surveys objectively?

Load More